[Tyson]

toaster22,
Have you tried the E5's with the Ety tri-flanges? IMO, they keep pretty much everything I liked about the Shure tri-flange sound, and added in the ultra high frequency detail, and without fatigue.

 

[earful]

are the ety tri-flanges smaller or larger than those for the e5s?

 

[toaster]

hey tyson,

i just tried the Ety triflanges on the shures, and they do in fact bring out more of the high end. The Etys sparkle (predominantly the texture of high register violins) still appears to be more so than with the Shures, however the margin of difference here is now less.

The way that i see it any way, is that the Shures do everything the ER-4's do, but much better. And the Shures also do much more, than the Etys do, and do that very well. The only thing the Shures lack, is the bit of sparkle in the highs, but it is not much, and it does cause fatigue.

To my ears, and for my tastes, the Shures are clearly superior.

When it comes to their prices, it makes a lot of sense to me.

I can see why the Etys are worth the 250 or so, as they do some things, mainly violins, very well. (that is really what i think their main strength is over the Shures.)

The Shures are worth 450. They do everything the Etys do, minus the high viloin notes, but they do everything else the etys do, better. On top of this they do many other things better than the Etys, that the Etys actually do not do at all, and that is mainly breathing more life into the music, by capturing resonance, impact and tonality.

earful - yes, the ety tri-flange sleeves are smaller, mainly in thickness, than the shure tri-flanges. i am actually having some trouble maintaining a good seal with them because they are smaller. but apparently tyson has no problem in this regard. i think i will stick with the shure tri-flanges for my main use with the e5's. i really have no problems with them.

 

[RunsWithScissors]

toaster22 - maybe I missed this but did you perform your comparative testing with WAVs or MP3s or some other format? Can you give details on the format - how did you rip, what encoder and what encoder settings if compression was used?

I'd also like to see a listing of what music you used. I only noticed a couple of references.

Thanks for taking time to post your impressions.

 

[toaster]

hey scissors - i have mainly mp3's on my ipod. a lot of stuff has been encoded in itunes, but some i have not encoded myself, so i am not sure exactly what encoder was used.

as far as the compression goes, i have primarily 320 kbps files, fewer 192 kbps files and hardly any 128 kbps files.

i went through all of the testing within 6-8 hours of listening, so i will allow you to make your own judgments regarding the importance of this. i will assure you though, that i feel very confident in all of my comments and analysis about the ER-4's.

i think it is very important to say this: if you are biased or unfair in some way during the course of attempting to "compare" or "test" different headphones, no matter how long you spend with them, you will not create a fair and balanced review. although i could have potentially spent weeks with the etymotics, i truly to not believe any of my views on them would have changed. i spent enough time, until i felt i had a solid view on them.

in my review i really did try to be fair. i made good comments about the etymotics where i thought they were deserved; they do have higher textural resolve than the shures, and this shows through mainly on orchestral music.
this is the best thing that the etys have going for them, and if you want high-end detail above all else, the etymotics DO WIN. however, this extra texture, like has been said before, can potentially come at the price of listening fatigue rather quickly. (for me this turned out to be true.) the etymotics also seem to have a lack of tonality, impact and resonance when compared to the shures, perhaps these can be justifications for the shures higher price tag. this is something clearly evident after just a few moments of listening.

everything that i described contributes to the overall sonic signature of each phone, which for the most part, does not change. and for this reason i do not even feel whether i tested with wav's or mp3's is that important to the reader. yes there are quality differences i can notice between 128 kbps files and 320 kbps files, but it equally effects both headphones, i am aware of it, and consciously made sure not to end up taking points away becase the treble sounded poor on the shures or the etymotics because of the 128 kbps file being played. that is a mistake i would never make.

as far as the selection of music goes, i considered going through each song and saying how much i liked it, but this would have gotten pointless by about the third song. think about it this way: my views on the sound representation for each phone never changed, and it would not change from song to song. for the same reason i think the etys sound good in orchestral music due to their higher-frequency textural resolve, i still think they sound good in that respect for that same reason on any other music that has a violin, whether it be greig, or yellowcard. what i thought was more important, was to focus on specific characteristics and detail, what was good or bad, about the ER-4 and the E5. i would also expect people to infer, based on what i wrote, that if they are looking for solid bass, they should expect the E5's to be much better in that regard whether it be for the timpani in an orchestral piece or the bassline in a techno song.

i guess i really do not believe that the quality of the song or the type of music listened to is worth mentioning when it comes to a review like this. i think what is most important is mentioning the specific sound qualities of each, in an effort so that readers can hopefully recognize and understand what is being said, and say, "yeah, that's the kind of sound i am looking for in a headphone." i think the type of music, and the quality it is encoded at, is ultimately irrelevant, as long as you make sure not to hold it against the headphone, which i certainly did not.

basically, what i said in my review is really what i would tell you overall you can expect to hear, if you listen to any music on an ipod with the ER-4 or E5.

i hope this answers your questions.

 

[bthall]

Ety4p's vs. Shure E5's

higher range vs. lower range

thinner vs. thicker

more accurate vs. more euphonic

more sparkle vs. more lush

brighter vs. darker

None of these adjectives are meant to be derogatory, they only DIFFERENTIATE.

You pays your money, you takes your pick.

Me, I'm Shure which one is for me...

BarryT

 

[RunsWithScissors]

Hi toaster22 - thanks for responding to my questions.

I respect your opinion and the choices and approach you took in your review. I simply have a different opinion in that I believe that the source/format matters as well as the actual music used for testing. The reason I feel this way is that if you can describe your perceptions of the way these phones sound with a specific song in a specific format, I can then listen to the same exact song in the same exact format from my own source (same or different from yours) with my own phones (same or different from yours) and determine where our perceptions match and where they differ. This will help me to understand your perceptions and also help me to identify with a review if I've already heard a particular song with those phones or if I simply like the same music and can expect to get a similar experience if I choose to try/buy the phones you discuss.

I believe this goes a long way to stating factual details about the way the sound was perceived and also about how the reviewer was biased or objective in the impressions described.

Unfortunately when it comes to compression, the preparation, encoding and the encoder do matter and will color the results. MP3 specifically is a perceptual encoding algorithm. I understand that the same source was tested/compared on both phones in your review, but it still matters in my opinion.

Taking this to an extreme (which I understand were NOT the conditions present in your test), if dynamics or full spectrum are not present in your source (due to bad, lossy encoded format for example) then no matter how resolving or dynamic the phones are that are under test, the information necessary to illustrate these characteristics of the phones is simply not present in the source and therefore cannot be presented to the listener - just trying to make a point as to why the source matters (to me).

The type of music matters too. If all you listen to is classical and all I listen to is rock, then the qualities you and I feel are important in our music may differ dramatically. For instance, some classical listeners may want to be able to point to where the instruments are and may also want clear separation of notes, whereas some rock lovers may want exciting, dynamic phones with visceral impact and can possibly trade off for less resolution or depth/soundstage. If you don't listen to the same music I do, you may simply never look for the same things in your listening experience that I do - just making another point.

As a reader of your review, I want to be able to identify with you. This will help me to determine if the phones are of interest to me in the way that they will enhance/suit my listening experience.

Describing a listening experience to others via text is like trying to describe color to a blind person. I can tell you that 'blue' is like a cool, smooth stone in your hands, or 'white' is like puffy, cotton balls in your hands but does this paint the same picture for everyone that reads/feels/sees it? It does come down to perception no matter how objective you try to be IMHO. There have to be points of reference for everyone to identify with and there will always be points of preference or emotion that are also necessary. If you never stated that one/both of these phones is 'fun', I wouldn't bother reading anymore so this perception is also important.

Thanks again for posting your impressions. Sorry if this is off-topic as I realize we should try to stay on track with the etys and shures in this thread.

 

[toaster]

Scissors - I understand what you're saying, and i suppose it is possible for their to be differences among encodings, but it is quite impractical for me to get into that level of detail when all people really want to know about is the sound. i think you're one of the only ones who is that hardcore about all these specifics, which is not at all a bad thing.

with what you said about musical tastes, and rock and classical, i totally agree with you. i figured my comments about each phone and talking specifically about their strengths in certain areas, would give people the impression of what music they would be better for. i guess i could have been more in depth here as well, but again i thought i what i wrote would have satisfied most people.

anyway, all of my comments still stand. i do concede that it is possible what i said could be made more definitive based on the type of encoding used on the mp3's and the encoder used to make them, but i am skeptical my analysis of sound would have changed at all. they are my views anyway.

hey - even if i mentioned the encoding, the encoder, the serial number on my ipod, and the time i ripped the files, we'd still have a different set of ears right? it all comes down to practicality.

 

[RunsWithScissors]

Quote:

hey - even if i mentioned the encoding, the encoder, the serial number on my ipod, and the time i ripped the files, we'd still have a different set of ears right? it all comes down to practicality.

agreed

(we gotta get a Shure smiley!)

I'm gonna try both myself. I was just hoping to have some reference points so I could more directly compare. TTVJ is sending me both cans for evaluation and I should have them next week (hopefully Monday). Todd rocks!

 

[toaster]

i look forward to reading your impressions.

 

[AndyH]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 i just tried the Ety triflanges on the shures, and they do in fact bring out more of the high end. The Etys sparkle (predominantly the texture of high register violins) still appears to be more so than with the Shures, however the margin of difference here is now less. {Snip} earful - yes, the ety tri-flange sleeves are smaller, mainly in thickness, than the shure tri-flanges. i am actually having some trouble maintaining a good seal with them because they are smaller. but apparently tyson has no problem in this regard. i think i will stick with the shure tri-flanges for my main use with the e5's. i really have no problems with them.

Actually, the only dimension that is different on the Ety tri-flange versus the Shure tri-flange appears to be the length of the "stalk" (with the Shure's being quite a bit longer). The diameter of the flanges appears to be the same to me.

Like Tyson, I too like the Ety tri-flange length better than the stock Shure tri-flange length. One thing that helped me to achieve a better seal with the Ety tri-flanges on the E5's was to not push the tri-flange tip all the way down to the "stop" on the E5 nozzle. I'd guess I have maybe 0.75 - 1.00 mm of space between the end of the Ety tri-flange stalk and the "stop" on the E5 nozzle. This pushes the tri-flange that much deeper into your ear and should provide a better seal. You may have to play with this length as your ears are likely different than mine. Once placed with this "gap", my Ety tri-flange tips have remained snug on the E5 nozzles and haven't moved, despite being inserted into my ears several times a day.

 

[toaster]

i think andy is right about the stalk length being the only difference.

the ety stalk definitely seemed "smaller" somehow to me. i thought it was in the diameter of the flanges. what i actually think i was feeling was the lack of the stalk up to the third flange.

see, with the shure triflanges, the stalk not only runs through all 3 flanges on the inside, but also protrudes out a few centimeters. (this is the part people usually cut off to mod.)

with the ety's triflanges, the stalk does not protrude out through the flanges at all. in fact, it only runs to about the middle of the second flange. so the third flange is hollow, with no stalk running through it.

due to this characteristic of the ety triflange, the largest flange appeared "smaller" to me at first, however after considering andy's comments, i think he is right. it does seem like the diameter of the largest flange on the ety triflange is smaller, due to the greater compression that occurs when you use it with the e5's, because there is not stalk to keep it rigid.

 

[RunsWithScissors]

I now have a set of Shure E5s and a set of Ety ER4P (with P/S cable) to audition for a couple of weeks courtesy of Todd (TTVJ our forum sponsor - thanks Todd!

) I'll reserve impressions until I can spend some quality time with both sets of phones and may post more later. I really just need to decide for myself if I like one better than the other and if I'm going to give up my E3s for these or look elsewhere - not looking for advice on this [yet] but I wanted to comment on the E5 cables.

How come in all the posts I've read about the Shure e5, no one has mentioned what a pain in the @$$ the cord is on these phones? It tangles and kinks if you just look at it crosseyed and the jury is still out on this memory-cable thingy - I can't decide if it's the best thing since sliced bread or if it is an instrument of the Devil? I believe I saw Bangraman mention something about an "auto-tangling cord" and (if I got that right) this is a good description. I MUCH prefer the cords on the E2 and E3 to this stiff, tangly E5.

Anybody have any comments on taming the E5 cable and perhaps fit/insertion tips? After the first day with them, I got the hang of inserting them but it was definitely much more difficult than using E2 and E3, both of which I've owned for months so I assumed insertion with E5 would be a no-brainer. I definitely get a good seal but I have to work at it for a couple of minutes and I feel like I'm screwing in a light bulb to get the angles right on the E5. Good sound should not be this much work!

 

[lindrone]

You'll get used to it pretty easily, and the memory cable will become a helpful instrument before you know it. Once you learn how to orient them, it's actually easier putting them on with the memory cable than without. The memory cable allows the E5c to "self-orient" and also hung from your ear when it's only half-way plugged in.. good for those times when you need to just unplug them a little bit to have a conversation.

With E2c and E3c, you put the drivers in, then you manually "lift" the cable around your ears.. or you have cables routed first and then plug the driver into your ears... with E5c I've always been able to do it in one step.

 

[bthall]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunsWithScissors I now have a set of Shure E5s and a set of Ety ER4P (with P/S cable) to audition for a couple of weeks courtesy of Todd (TTVJ our forum sponsor - thanks Todd! ) I'll reserve impressions until I can spend some quality time with both sets of phones and may post more later. I really just need to decide for myself if I like one better than the other and if I'm going to give up my E3s for these or look elsewhere - not looking for advice on this [yet] but I wanted to comment on the E5 cables. How come in all the posts I've read about the Shure e5, no one has mentioned what a pain in the @$$ the cord is on these phones? It tangles and kinks if you just look at it crosseyed and the jury is still out on this memory-cable thingy - I can't decide if it's the best thing since sliced bread or if it is an instrument of the Devil? I believe I saw Bangraman mention something about an "auto-tangling cord" and (if I got that right) this is a good description. I MUCH prefer the cords on the E2 and E3 to this stiff, tangly E5. Anybody have any comments on taming the E5 cable and perhaps fit/insertion tips? After the first day with them, I got the hang of inserting them but it was definitely much more difficult than using E2 and E3, both of which I've owned for months so I assumed insertion with E5 would be a no-brainer. I definitely get a good seal but I have to work at it for a couple of minutes and I feel like I'm screwing in a light bulb to get the angles right on the E5. Good sound should not be this much work!

Time and practice are all you need. With a little of both, I've found that the E5's are actually easier to work with than the E4p's.

One small trick. When you go to put them away in the circular carrying case, wind the cord around 3 or 4 of your fingers to get the correct loop size (as I'm sure you've already found), BUT always start the wind-up from the PLUG end and finish with the HEADPHONE end. It makes taking them out of the case and using them next time, much faster and easier.

BarryT